Andrew Bakas appeals the 80-month sentence imposed following his guilty plea conviction for one count of passing counterfeit obligations of the United States, in violation of 18 U.S.C. § 472.

A district court’s legal analysis at sentencing is reviewed de novo. United States v. Olis, 429 F.3d 540, 545 (5th Cir. 2005). Bakas argues that the district court erred in assigning him a criminal history score based on three offenses that did not occur until after the counterfeiting offense to which he pleaded guilty. Bakas’s argument is foreclosed by this court’s decision in United States v. Lara, 975 F.2d 1120, 1129 (5th Cir. 1992). The controlling sequence of events is not the order in which the crimes are committed but the order in which the sentences are imposed. See U.S.S.G. § 4A1.2(a)(1). Bakas also argues that the district court’s assessment of a criminal history score violates the goals of the Sentencing Guidelines. However, he does not support his conclusional argument with a citation to any persuasive authority.

The judgment of the district court is AFFIRMED.